linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the mm tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <85e0405e-98e7-9610-c76a-de8ab8131a2b@kernel.dk>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 18:49:12 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the mm tree

On 3/22/23 5:26?PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:15:48 -0600 Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> wrote:
> 
>> On 3/22/23 5:13?PM, David Howells wrote:
>>> Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  +	if (unlikely(iov_iter_is_pipe(i))) {
>>>>  +		copied = copy_page_to_iter_pipe(page, offset, bytes, i);
>>>>  +		goto out;
>>>>  +	}
>>>
>>> This bit would need to be removed from copy_page_to_iter_atomic() as the two
>>> functions it calls should be removed by the patch in the block tree.
>>
>> Maybe it'd be better to consolidate rather than split the changes over
>> two trees?
> 
> fyi, Lorenzo has sent out v7 of this series.  I'll be pushing this in
> an hour or so.  After which I suggest Stephen removes those (now) two
> lines and sends out one of his "build fix" emails which can be the
> basis for Linus's resolution.
> 
> Or I can just steal "iov_iter: Kill ITER_PIPE"...

Or how about we just make sure to queue up items that touch them same
stuff in the same tree? I've already had this queued for a week, and
seems pretty silly to shuffle things around because some thing got
posted in 4 iterations today and then queued up right after.

Plus the build is now broken, so maybe a bit more diligence would be
required here than the drive-by-merging.

-- 
Jens Axboe